America has better stadia. And I thought they made a good job of the '94 World Cup. Probably easier for me to follow matches (time-zone wise) if it's in England though so I would personally go for England.

Wouldn't be fair. They only just had in 1994, surely someone who hasn't had it for a much long time (ie, England haven't had it since 1966 and are considering a bid) or someone who has never had it at all should get it rather than someone who had it only 20 odd years ago. Would be similar to Mexico getting it in 1970 and then again in 1986, ridiculous.

Wouldn't be fair. They only just had in 1994, surely someone who hasn't had it for a much long time (ie, England haven't had it since 1966 and are considering a bid) or someone who has never had it at all should get it rather than someone who had it only 20 odd years ago. Would be similar to Mexico getting it in 1970 and then again in 1986, ridiculous.

The last time a US city hosted the Olympic games was 1996, since then Sydney, Athens, Beijing and London have been awarded the games. So how do the US cities always get awarded the Olympic games? 4 times out of 28 for the US is not excessive.

London will have hosted the summer games three times, more than any other city is this fair?

Yes..but remember. I wouldent make fun of London and am bias against America.

And your wrong. America hosted in 2002. Salt Lake. So seriously. America got 2 in the last 15 years. More than anyother.

Yes it is a travesty that a UK & NI city has never been awarded the winter Olympics.

If you look I listed summer Olympiads, it is false to bring winter games into the equation due to the restricted geographical locations open to these events and you are still wrong, countries do not get awarded Olympics, cities do.

London has had more Olympics awarded to it than any other city in the world.

If we are going to get pedantic when you mention America getting everything I take it you are talking about the continental landmass, because obviously you would have said the United States of America or the US / USA if you were talking about a specific country.

As for England hosting the World Cup that would be a European Country hosting 3 out of the last 4 competitions, a lot less fair than the US getting it.

Please explain the Europe having "3 of the last 4" comment in more detail.2014 should be going to South America, if it doesn't then 2018 must. If 2018 goes to Europe, many of the "major" footballing nations have had it relatively 'recently.' That is, Germany 2006, France 2002, Italy 1990, Spain 1982. England won't have had it for 52 years, so surely have to be one of the favourites if it goes to Europe.

Please explain the Europe having "3 of the last 4" comment in more detail.2014 should be going to South America, if it doesn't then 2018 must. If 2018 goes to Europe, many of the "major" footballing nations have had it relatively 'recently.' That is, Germany 2006, France 2002, Italy 1990, Spain 1982. England won't have had it for 52 years, so surely have to be one of the favourites if it goes to Europe.

Sorry my mistake I was getting two stories mixed up, there was / is concerns about South Africa’s ability to host the 2010 world cup finals due to security issues and infrastructure problems, and it has been muted about the 2010 finals being relocated in a different location.

These have been denied by FIFA, but that is where the three in four numbers for Europe comes from.

FIFA is made up of UEFA (Europe), CONCACAF (North, Central America and the Caribbean), AFC (Asia), CAF (Africa), CONMEBOL (South America) and Oceania.

If it is rotating CONCACAF, Asia and Oceania would be due to host it before a return to Europe so that would push it out to 2022 at the very least. Oceania can not be ruled out after the Sydney Olympics proved they could successfully host a major sporting event and they are the only confederation never to have hosted the finals.

As for England not hosting the finals for 52 years, a Scandinavian / Nordic country has not hosted it since Sweden in 1958 and an Eastern European country has never held the finals are they not more valid contenders than England? But England will be one of the favourites if it is to come to Europe.

I dont see it as Europe getting it. I see it as England. I dont care much for Europe

It is this insular arrogant attitude held not only by yourself but the English FA that has cost England in the passed and may do so again in future.

When English football was desperately seeking to regain credibility on the international stage in the wake of the post-Heysel ban from European club competition, the F.A. promised to support Germany's World Cup 2006 bid in exchange for Germany's support for England's bid for the 1996 European Championship. Germany delivered in full, and England won the right to host Euro '96.

However they went back on the deal and set up a counter bid to Germany and lost the support of the majority of Europe, and with it any hope of hosting the 2006 world cup finals. Their deceit and lies might come back to haunt them once more when 2018 voting takes place if European delegates have long memories.

If it is rotating CONCACAF, Asia and Oceania would be due to host it before a return to Europe so that would push it out to 2022 at the very least. Oceania can not be ruled out after the Sydney Olympics proved they could successfully host a major sporting event and they are the only confederation never to have hosted the finals.

As for England not hosting the finals for 52 years, a Scandinavian / Nordic country has not hosted it since Sweden in 1958 and an Eastern European country has never held the finals are they not more valid contenders than England? But England will be one of the favourites if it is to come to Europe.

Yes Australia certainly could host it, although I don't see it going there any time soon for some reason.And true about the likes of Sweden and Russia. They should also be very valid contenders for the next Europe world cup. Somehow I see England as being more likely to be given it than Russia, but perhaps that's fuelled by bias. Countries like those 3 mentioned should certainly be having it before the USA next do anyway IMO.